Your Turn

Roman Polanski rape victim, Samantha Geimer has written a book. The cover photo is above. The cover is also getting a lot of press because it is a photo that was taken by Roman Polanski of Samantha a few days before he raped her at the age of 13.Appropriate? Helpful for her emotional healing?

Since she got possession of this and the other photographs he took during "discovery" in her lawsuit, and since it shows us exactly what she was just before Polanski drugged and orally, vaginally and anally raped her while she was begging him to stop, I think this cover picture is very much appropriate.

She was the one attacked, only her opinion of whether or not it's appropriate or helpful really counts.

But let's be honest, all the coverage I've seen of the book centers around her use of a pic taken by Polanski. Her publisher is certainly working it for all its worth to make those sales.

I recall that she has previously asked that the whole thing kind of be forgotten — I think mostly b/c she wanted to move on with her life, less about forgiving her rapist. But if she gets some money out of it, it's her story to tell, I guess.

But I gotta endorse anything that reminds the world that Roman Polanski drugged and sodomized a thirteen-year-old girl. Fucker. There is no excuse. And it chaps my ass that he's a free man who ran from serving his time and is defended by so many.

I'm prepared to take a lot of flack for this, but here's my take. Yes, Polanski is a miserable excuse for a human being. Yes, he deserves to be punished for his actions. However, that being said, I don't forsee his ever actually serving time for his crimes, and while I refuse to debate the therapeutic merits of his victim's book, I will say that it frankly reeks of commercialism and an attempt to profit from this tragedy that this book is published now.Is it going to further damage his reputation? No. Is it going to help a prosecutor create a case? No. Why was it written? Because someone wanted money. Plain and simple. I wouldn't be surprised if an offer wasn't floated to the Polanski camp for non publication. But then again, I'm jaded.

@ Merlin, the point is to make sure people remember what he did, and if he ever returns to this country throw him in prison for his crimes. If Hollywierd had their way, they would throw him a parade! For some reason in ollywierd they don't believe it is a crime to take this kind of advantage over children.

I would rather she write the book and make money off of it than him. A lot of people will say of a woman who's been cheated on by her husband "she should get him for all he's worth!" Why can't a rape victim say "if people won't stop talking about it then why SHOULDN'T I make some money." Who are we to judge her.

I think it is a compelling portrait of how POLANSKI saw her. This isn't some selfie, this is how the perpetrator saw his victim and her use of it forces us to see what he coveted, took and ultimately destroyed.Commercial? Sure.Why shouldn't she FINALLY get some compensation. Her story is intimately linked to his, it gets more mention then Sharon Tate!No reporter has let it go and it's a cycle of continual abuse as each reporter tries to get "the real story" year after year, story after story.GET IT GIRL! Fuck Him UP!For ONCE in your life, be the lead his name is linked to!

I with Shakira….it's her story to tell and she should be the one to profit from it. Maybe this is therapeutic for her as well. I can't judge this woman. I think the photo is a powerful statement and is appropriate.

It's her book. It's her life. Maybe this is her way of taking ownership of her person again, rather than repeatedly being victimized over and over each time his name comes up in the press. I think it's powerful. And brave.

I dunno. History is written by the victors, and if she doesn't get her story out there, 50 years from now this may be seen as a great injustice to the mighty Polanski. Some already see it that way now.

Errol Flynn was also accused of of statutory rape – although the victims were much older – and in film histories, it's mostly treated like a joke.

I think she's motivated by money, and I'm 100% okay with this. She deserves something, because it's not like she'll ever get justice through the legal system.

I'm curious about what her stance is in the book. She's previously come out and said she doesn't want Roman jailed anymore, and wants the DA to drop the matter entirely. I felt at the time she was paid off by Roman and that motivated her statements.

However, the fucker fled the US to avoid punishment and deserves jail time for that action too.

If anyone is interested, you can read her evidence statement on The Smoking Gun. It seems she had a messed up childhood – was regularly using drugs and alcohol, and had already lost her virginity (by consent) to a boyfriend. Prime target for a paedo like Polanski.

I think that picture speaks more than any other older image could. She's just a kid. I don't acer what her mother did, altho that's an abomination, Polanski still took advantage of her. It's her story to tell. Maybe she wants to get out the truth because there's been so much speculation. She's remained silent so long when she could have spoken, I don't get the sense this is all about money.

I think it's perfect, as it shows a normal girl who is oblivious that her life is about to be destroyed by the very man taking the picture. This is a last image of her privacy, her psychological freedom & innocence of what evils exist in the world.

Any one of us could be this girl. Her molester/rapist just happens to be famous.

(IDK enough about the book to form an opinion as to her motive for writing it, I'm talking about the choice of cover.)

Victims feel a loss of control. I think this is a good thing for her to feel like the case is in her control now. And 100 years from now someone can find her side of the story, and not just his and the courts. Good for her.

Wow, I just read the Grand Jury minutes on the smoking gun website. I knew Polanski did this but never read the details. He took her to Jack Nicholsons house. A dark haired woman was at the house and spoke with the girl, must have known what was going on. Disgusting. I wonder if that was Angelica Huston?

Iheartjacksparrow: "She admitted she wasn't a virgin at the time, so she wasn't so innocent."

Innocence and not being a virgin, are not mutually exclusive. The same goes for being a virgin and being "sinful" or guilty.

Libby: You're right – to a certain extent. Not everyone is "too innocent to get raped," i.e. rapists. Sexual abusers getting sexually abused by other sexual abusers, e.g. while incarcerated, seems like "karmic justice" to me. I can empathize with anyone, but not everyone gets my sympathy.

The plain truth is, prosecutors f*cked up the case. When you have the JUDGE telling the defendant "RUN!" you know it's f*cked up. Even Samantha has publicly said she supports Polanski's efforts to get the case dismissed.

I'm glad she wrote a book. I'll read it. I'm always open to hearing more about all sides of a story, because there always more than two.

I hope Johnny Depp and all the other blinded by art morons in Hollywood take a good look at the young face of this child and be reminded of their own children… And then envision them being drugged up and raped vaginally and anally while pleading for mercy and to stop… And then have Hollywood embrace the monster. Because he's talented. Sick f*ck flock of foolios. I think the picture is totally appropriate, so long as the survivor chose it. Her desire for anonymity was destroyed when the case was brought up again. Better the world see the real victim, this child, and not the survivor as an adult 40 years later. See the CHILD. Whose innocence was savagely and brutally taken in a sick, pedophilic act of violence, cruelty and disturbed domination.

Merlin D Bear, let's take what you said and I could come to a different conclusion. When your perpetrator has escaped justice and looks like he will to continue to, and you can't get real closure, isn't revenge, a possible catharsis and helping just one girl who either experienced the same thing or to prevent just one girl from being put in the same position be worth all the scorn of those who say you are just doing it for the money? And if she is doing it for the money so what. Therapists are expensive. Do we know if any statement has been made as to where the proceeds of the book are going?

Hard to know if Polanski was any different before or during his marriage to Tate or he became the predator after that. In any event his tragedy does not give him licence to hurt other people and this girl was not the only one. The only one who could pin anything on him. This kind of predator is prolific in the entertainment and fashion industry. Along with parents who are willing to sell their kids, remember those Michael Jackson sleepovers, in essence to gain fame or favor.

I think the BEST photo is this one. The one before she was raped, as others have said. It's also important to remember that *this* girl will always carry that horrific event with her, well into her senior years, no matter what she looks like now.

I really don't care if it is appropriate or emotionally healing. She can do what she bloody well pleases as far as I am concerned. If she makes a ton of money, and I hope she does, and if she did it solely for money, it can never repay her for what was taken from her without her consent. Will it be emotionally healing? I don't see how it could not be, on whatever level for whatever reason. I have no criticism of her. There is no sensationalism that I can see on her part: she has been quiet for so long……and even if she hadn't. I am 100% in her corner. I have no criticism of her. I don't care what her reasons are. She has carte blanche and she can write the check.

So not the point. Having sex against your will is horrifically traumatic. It doesn't matter if she had sex before with consent. This is a CHILD. Even less able to deal with repercussions of an assault by a person in power.

Don't mean to come at you, this case really gets at me and I see a lot of victim blaming statements (most not intentional). It does not matter if she walked into his house naked, got drunk and passed out. NO ONE ever has the right to assault another person.

Fascinating how much judgement is thrown her way for using her own photograph on her own book cover to tell her own story, but so many movie stars stand behind Polanski because it wasn't rape-rape, even though the convicted rapist fled country to avoid jail time. But hey, she wasn't a virgin when she was raped, it's all good. (You, iheartjacksparrow, are an asshole. Virginity isn't a rape RSVP.)

Here is something that I wish someone would write about. I have wondered about it every now and then….Someone here said that a dark haired woman greeted the child and therefore must have known what was going on. Hate that, because I loved Angelica Huston. Hate that. But what I was going to say was that NO ONE, EVER has mentioned Jack Nicolson. Never. If anyone aided and abetted, it was him. He didn't know? He didn't hear her cries for help? He is given more of a pass than Polanski. I don't get it at all. I wish Enty would write about that angle. Please.

DISCLAIMER

CRAZY DAYS AND NIGHTS IS A GOSSIP SITE. THE SITE PUBLISHES RUMORS, CONJECTURE, AND FICTION. IN ADDITION TO ACCURATELY REPORTED INFORMATION, CERTAIN SITUATIONS, CHARACTERS AND EVENTS PORTRAYED IN THE BLOG ARE EITHER PRODUCTS OF THE AUTHOR'S IMAGINATION OR ARE USED FICTITIOUSLY. INFORMATION ON THIS SITE MAY CONTAIN ERRORS OR INACCURACIES; THE BLOG'S PROPRIETOR DOES NOT MAKE WARRANTY AS TO THE CORRECTNESS OR RELIABILITY OF THE SITE'S CONTENT. LINKS TO CONTENT ON AND QUOTATION OF MATERIAL FROM OTHER SITES ARE NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CRAZY DAYS AND NIGHTS.